Godowsky was only twenty-three
when he produced the first of his Studies
on Chopin’s Etudes. Relatively untutored
compositionally but already a formidable
teacher he sought in these works to
consider technical problems, to extend
technique, and to gain mastery over
mechanical limitations as well as increasing
his own repertoire. As he wrote, it
was whilst practising Étude Op.25
No.6 that he wondered how better he
could finger the double notes. Using
his own preferred fingerings he then
transposed the study purely for the
left hand – and found that such a solution
worked in other transpositions as well,
which accounts for the high number of
Left Hand studies amongst the Godowsky
Studies.

The coruscating physical
demands include unremitting contrapuntal
lines, constant invocations by Godowsky
for expressive playing (markings such
as molto espressivo are everywhere
– or seem to be) and a battery of Parnassus-invoking
virtuoso challenges for both hands but
for the left especially. These were
often carried out by means of inversion
– Godowsky giving to a large extent
the right hand lines to the left – but
the twenty-two studies for the left
hand alone went beyond such residual
recasting. These are fully-fledged masterpieces
of polyphonic writing involving incredible
fingerings and staggering, eyeball rolling
textures in which you would be seriously
hard pressed to think one hand alone
at work. Godowsky makes one hand sound
like two – and sometimes three – and
the disbelieving ear is at a loss to
know how.

The "53"
are actually augmented by a fifty-fourth
and the entirety consist variously of
transcriptions, free transcriptions,
inversions, free variations, etude-combinations,
cantus firmus and a kind of metamorphosis.
The decorative right hand flourishes,
chordal difficulties and harmonic density
add to the complexities and the result
is that there have been very few complete
traversals of the 53 on disc. David
Saperton, Godowsky’s son-in-law, recorded
some in the 1950s and nearer to us Carlo
Grante recorded the complete set for
Music and Arts. Marc-André Hamelin
has set down an epoch making set for
Hyperion.

Formidable and compelling,
these performances by Joyce Hatto represent
a remarkable distinction. It hardly
hinders matters that she is one of the
great Chopin players of the day. Given
the level of technical mastery required
to get fingers, thumbs, wrists, arms
and the kitchen sink round these studies
the confluence of sympathy with the
original etudes fused with Batwoman-like
pianistic agility makes these two discs
mandatory listening for those excited
by the genre. Of course readers will
want to know about Hamelin’s Hyperion
set. Well, having listened to both I
can say this; if you think Hamelin invincible
in this repertoire, prepare to ponder.

It’s going to be wearisome
to cite keys, opus and version numbers
so I’m going simply to note track numbers,
from the first volume first. Note Hatto’s
pathos and pointing in 1 but also note
how Hamelin scores in 3 through control
of voicings. He tends to pick out inner
voicings in 4 whereas she corrals them.
There’s nothing between them in 5 and
both are playful and affectionate in
7 though Hatto’s timing vests it with
fractionally the more wit. Note how
in 9, at almost the same tempo, Hatto’s
rhythm sounds the more natural, whereas
Hamelin’s sounds just that bit too divisive.
In 10 the Canadian is at his most gossamer
and fluent, Hatto a touch insistent.
More inner voicings are to be heard
with Hamelin in 12, but Hatto is more
poetic in 13 and employs the more effective
rubati. I felt this in 21 as well –
her playing is really alive and the
mercurial magic that informs so much
of her Chopin playing certainly courses
here. Towards the end of the first volume
one finds that Hamelin’s speeds pick
up; before they were evenly matched
and in maters of articulation there’s
little between them. This works to Hatto’s
advantage in 23; she is more metrical
and hence funnier, bringing real wit
to this study in a way Hamelin sometimes
shies away from. It’s a personal matter
but I did find him inferior to her in
24 – a touch monotonous. In the sole
study on Op.10 No.11 she sounds more
"spaced" – one gets the feeling
that though this is a study it’s also
more than a study; there’s something
else going on as well.

In the second of her
two-volume set (both available singly)
we find that touches of rubato inflect
her playing rather more than Hamelin’s.
I realise that this will be somewhat
controversial given Hamelin’s status
– he is an astounding musician, no question
– but I did find at times a rather bar-by-bar
approach to some of these studies. Try
Disc Two No.6 – the version for Op.25
No3, third version B. I feel she shapes
phrases more maturely, the rubati sound
more natural and ethos is more explicitly
Chopinesque. True, he flows more freely
in 7 but what about No.8, the first
version of Op.25 No.3, the one that
made Cortot so cross when he heard it.
Maybe you’ll agree when I say I find
Hatto more aerated and lively, each
succeeding "outrage" sounding
compellingly logical. I definitely side
with her over 10 – such insouciant swagger,
which sounds much more natural than
Hamelin’s slowings down. He takes a
more halting, military approach to 11
– though their tempo is the same – but
cedes to Hatto in 13 in matters of geniality,
and cultivates a heavier texture in
14. His articulation is certainly sharper
and more incisive in 17.

All this goes to demonstrate
that even in these superhuman studies
there is room for manoeuvre – textually,
in terms of tempi, tempi relationships,
rhythm, articulation, pedalling and
the like. There is certainly room for
both views. There is also the question
of the recording aesthetics. Hyperion’s
is famously full of close clarity and
warmth. Concert Artist generally tries
to replicate a concert seat hearing.
This can sometimes mean that, in comparison
with Hyperion’s detailing, CA can appear
shallower and less immediately detailed.
It’s a question of perspective. What
can’t be denied is the galvanising nature
of the performances here by Hatto. If
you are tempted to think that Hamelin’s
superstar name will invariably eclipse
Hatto you will be wrong. The performances
demonstrate comparable virtuosity. It
diminishes nothing from Hamelin’s great
achievement to say that I find Hatto’s
performances often more persuasive.

...A final word about the documentation;
the booklet is full of analytical detail.
Like the rest of this issue it's first
class.

Reviews
from previous monthsJoin the mailing list and receive a hyperlinked weekly update on the
discs reviewed. detailsWe welcome feedback on our reviews. Please use the Bulletin
Board
Please paste in the first line of your comments the URL of the review to
which you refer.